Just a quick post, but earlier
this morning I received this email from Bill Schmalfeldt:
From: Bill
Schmalfeldt [email omitted]
Date: February 21,
2013 8:02:37 AM EST
To: Aaron Worthing
Subject: Legally
Authorized E-Mail Contact Notifying Aaron Walker of Copyright Infringement
Mr. Walker.
You have posted a
number of YouTube videos that contain a copyrighted photo of myself used in my
book, "Put On Your Parky Face," copyright 2011,
And you have used
audio from my copyrighted internet radio show that explicitly states at the end
of every episode, "Blood on the Microphone is a presentation of Deep Brain Media, Copyright Bill Schmalfeldt,
All Rights Reserved."
I have already filed
a copyright complaint with YouTube, but you can show you are capable of
understanding copyright law by removing these videos and images, posted without
my permission, immediately.
Thank you.
Bill Schmalfeldt
Elkridge, MD
Except of course I do understand
copyright law. For instance, 17 U.S.C. §107
states in relevant part that:
Notwithstanding the
provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work... for
purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including
multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an
infringement of copyright.
Now the post in question he is
complaining about, where I included numerous audio clips from his show was to
inform you that:
1) Bill Schmalfeldt was
threatening people, including myself, Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey,
John Hoge and Lee Stranahan—who have both filed charges against him for
electronic and ordinary harassment,
2) in order to demonstrate that
Schmalfeldt was making jokes implying that Lee Stranahan’s wife was a whore,
3) to demonstrate that
Schmalfeldt was making jokes about prostituting Lee Stranahan’s thirteen year
old daughter,
4) in order to show his general
tendency toward menacing conduct,
5) to show you he is associated
to Neal Rauhauser and by extension to Brett Kimberlin (he has already
associated himself with Brooks Bayyne, so he has given us a connection between
Brett Kimberlin and Brooks Bayne as well), and
6) to demonstrate that Neal Rauhauser
didn’t plan to show up for his summons as required by law.
I also criticized directly all of
this conduct. Thus this was covered by
fair use as serving a news, comment and criticism function.
But bluntly, if he claims to be a
journalist, if indeed he really was a journalist at one time, how could he not
know any of this? Every journalist knows exactly when and when they can't use copyrighted material; every journalist knows what fair use is.
And despite his claim that this
is a legally authorized communication, it is not. First, he has stated on the air that he has
hired a lawyer. That lawyer can make
this communication rather than him.
Second, it is a bogus claim and he knows that. Third, he already stated he complained to
YouTube and so there was no need to contact me at all.
So lacking a legal purpose his
email is in fact a further violation of Maryland law, representing another
harassing communication without a legal purpose. Apparently he wants me to file charges
against him, too.
And at the same time it also
represents a cheap thuggish attempt to stop me from talking about his
despicable and indeed criminal behavior, including his real threats to the
lives of others. The First Amendment
protects this use. He can pound sand for
all I care.
---------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
I have accused some people,
particularly Brett Kimberlin, of
reprehensible conduct. In some cases, the conduct is even
criminal. In all cases, the only justice I want is through the
appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system. I do not want to see vigilante violence
against any person or any threat of such violence. This kind of conduct is not only morally
wrong, but it is counter-productive.
In the particular case of Brett
Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him. Do not call him. Do not write him a letter. Do not write him an email. Do not text-message him. Do not engage in any kind of directed
communication. I say this in part
because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want
that to happen to him.
And for that matter, don’t go on
his property. Don’t sneak around and try
to photograph him. Frankly try not to
even be within his field of vision. Your
behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to
mention trespass and other concerns).
And do not contact his
organizations, either. And most of all, leave his family alone.
The only exception to all that is
that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with
contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might
report. And even then if he tells you to
stop contacting him, obey that request. That
this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that
a person asks you to stop and you refuse.
And let me say something
else. In my heart of hearts, I don’t
believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above. But if any of you have, stop it, and if you
haven’t don’t start.
He's certainly not getting any smarter. -- SPQR
ReplyDelete